CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 464Astrophysics and Star Formation StudiesStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstro and Planetary Science

The Birth Environment of the Solar System

Open access
Adams, Fred C.·2010·Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics
DOI 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130830
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This review examines our current understanding of the possible birth environments of our Solar System. Because most stars form within groups and clusters, the question becomes one of determining the nature of the birth aggregate of the Sun. This discussion starts by reviewing Solar System properties that provide constraints on our environmental history. We then outline the range of star-forming environments that are available in the Galaxy and discuss how they affect star and planet formation. The nature of the solar birth cluster is constrained by many physical considerations, including radiation fields provided by the background environment, dynamical scattering interactions, and by the necessity of producing the short-lived radioactive nuclear species inferred from meteoritic measurements. Working scenarios for the solar birth aggregate can be constructed, as discussed herein, although significant uncertainties remain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130830

Cites

136 of 136 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The solar system almost certainly originated within a star cluster, and the orbital distribution of trans-Neptunian objects would have been affected by cluster dynamics within the first ~100 Myr of the solar system's evolution.

    “Importantly, this broadening is expected, given that the solar system almost certainly originated within a star cluster (see Adams 2010; Arakawa & Kokubo 2023), and the orbital distribution of TNOs would have been affected by cluster dynamics within the first ∼100 Myr of the solar system's evolution.”

    From Generation of Low-inclination, Neptune-crossing Trans-Neptunian Objects by Planet Nine (2024) · cites this paper as Adams 2010

    The Overview (Section 7.3, p. 49) says the Solar System was likely born in a cluster, and the proposed scenario (Section 7.2, p. 46) places a possible Sedna-altering stellar encounter at a cluster age of 10–100 Myr. Section 4.5 (p. 20) discusses how such encounters could affect Sedna’s orbit and the Kuiper Belt edge. The source does not establish that cluster birth was almost certain or that the orbital distribution of TNOs as a whole was necessarily affected. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The solar system did not originate in isolation, and instead formed within a cluster of 10^3-10^4 stars.

    “Various lines of evidence indicate the solar system did not originate in isolation, and instead formed within a cluster of 10 3 10 4 stars (Adams and Laughlin 2001; Portegies Zwart 2009; Adams 2010; Pfalzner et al. 2015).”

    From The planet nine hypothesis (2019) · cites this paper as Adams 2010

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Allen L. et al. 2007. in Protostars and Planets V . ed. B Reipurth, D Jewitt, K Keil, pp. 361-376, Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press
  2. Belbruno E, Moro-Martin A, Malhotra R. 2008. submitted to Astron. J. arXiv:0808.3268 · arXiv
  3. Binney J, Tremaine S. 1987. Galactic Dynamics , Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press
  4. Cameron AGW. 1993. in Protostars and Planets III . ed. EH Levy, JI Lunine, pp. 47-73, Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press
  5. Goswami JN, Vanhala HAT. 2000. in Protostars and Planets IV . ed. V Mannings, AP Boss, SS Russell, pp. 963-994, Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press
  6. Hester JJ, Desch SJ. 2005. in Chondrites and the Protoplanetary Disk. ASP Conference Series, Vol. 341. ed. AN Krot, ERD Scott, B Reipurth, pp. 107-130, San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pacific
  7. Lissauer JJ, Stevenson DJ. 2007. in Protostars and Planets V . ed. B Reipurth, D Jewitt, K Keil, pp. 591-606, Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press
  8. Megeath ST, Gaidos E, Hester JJ, Adams FC, Bally J, Lee JE, Wolk S. 2008. in 14th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars Stellar Systems and the Sun. ASP Conference Series Vol. 384. ed. G van Belle, pp. 393-401, San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pacific
  9. Meyer BS. 2005. in Chondrites and the Protoplanetary Disk. ASP Conference Series, Vol. 341. ed. AN Krot, ERD Scott, B Reipurth, pp. 515-526, San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pacific
  10. Moeckel N, Bonnell IA. 2009. submitted to MNRAS , arXiv:0908.0253 · arXiv
  11. Proszkow EM. 2009. PhD Thesis University of Michigan
  12. Scalo JM. 1998. in The Stellar Initial Mass Function. ASP Conf. Series Vol. 142. ed. G Gilmore, D. Howell, pp. 201-236, San Francisco: Astron. Soc. Pacific
  13. Trigo-Rodriguez JM, Garcia-Hernandez DA, Lugaro M, Karakas AI, van Raai M, Lario PG, Manchado A. 2008, arXiv:0812.4358 · arXiv
  14. Wadhwa M, Amelin Y, Davis AM, Lugmair GW, Meyer B, Gounelle M, Desch SJ. 2007. in Protostars and Planets V . ed. B Reipurth, D Jewitt, K Keil, pp. 835-848, Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press
  15. Wasserburg GJ. 1985. in Protostars and Planets II . ed. DC Black, MS Matthews, pp. 703737, Tucson: Univ. Arizona Press
  16. Young ED, Gounelle M, Smith RL, Morris MR, Pontoppidan KM. 2009. Lunar Planetary Sci. Conf. 40:1967

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Adams, F. C.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Adams, Fred C.
Venue
Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2010-08-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
47-85
ISSN
  • 0066-4146 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4282
DOI
10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130830
OpenAlex
W2159354014
Cited by
464
References
136
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 23
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astro and Planetary Science
Keywords
star formation, planet formation, radiation field, dynamical scattering, short-lived radionuclides, meteorites, solar system formation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review